Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Sign in to follow this  
Tripredacus

[AppCompat] BurnInTest

Recommended Posts

This will be my first official project post thread. In this project, I am attempting to get PassMark's Burn In Test program to work in Windows PE 2.1 x86. Here are the project details:

Windows PE: v2.1 x86 (32 bit)

Application: BurnInTest v6.0.1002.0

Developer URL: PassMark Software

Additional Software

Microsoft Process Monitor

Heaven Tools PE Explorer (30 day trial, purchase for continued use)

This program comes with a plug-in to work in BartPE and Windows PE 1.x environments. Taco Bell has also been working on getting this program to work properly in v2.1. Currently, PassMark is in process of offering official support for this environment. While Taco Bell has been able to get the program to launch properly (using the /x switch), it still fails for me. This thread will be my log of my experiences.

The current instructions are to install the program on any computer. Then take the \BurnInTest folder and copy it into the WinPE. The BartPE plugin merely adds an option to launch BIT from its menu. You also need to copy MSVFW32.DLL into \SYSTEM32. After doing this and launching the PE, an attempt to run the program returns the following:

DirectX 9.0c or above is required to run the 3D tests. Please install DirectX 9.0 or higher and try again.

and

Error during startup. Error Number 1

Taco Bell has noted that he had not experienced the Error Number 1 issue. My first step was to run a ProcMon on bit.exe to see what files it uses to and then compare that with what I already had. I had originally run PE Explorer on bit.exe because it has a dependency scanner, however, ProcMon detailed additional dependency files not listed by PE Explorer. The following is the full list of files it uses:

\SYSTEM32\

advapi32.dll

apphelp.dll

cfgmgr32.dll

clbcatq.dll

comdlg32.dll

comres.dll

crypt32.dll

dnsapi.dll

gdi32.dll

iertutil.dll

imm32.dll

iphlpapi.dll

kernel32.dll

msacm32.dll

msasn1.dll

msctf.dll

msctfime.ime

msimg32.dll

msimtf.dll

msvcp60.dll

msvcrt.dll

msvfw32.dll

netapi32.dll

normaliz.dll

ntdll.dll

ntdsapi.dll

odbc32.dll

odbcbcp.dll

odbcint.dll

ole32.dll

oleaut32.dll

pdh.dll

psapi.dll

rpcrt4.dll

rpcss.dll

secur32.dll

setupapi.dll

shell32.dll

shimeng.dll

shlwapi.dll

urlmon.dll

user32.dll

userenv.dll

version.dll

wininet.dll

winmm.dll

winspool.drv

wldap32.dll

ws2_32.dll

ws2help.dll

xpsp2res.dll

\system32\AppPatch\

sysmain.sdb

\system32\wbem\

fastprox.dll

wbemprox.dll

wbemsvc.dll

Items in normal (black) text were already present in my winpe.wim. Items in Red were not present, and were not present in my VistaBusiness32.wim. Items in Green were not in the PE but were in the Vista WIM. I copied the known files from the Vista WIM into the Winpe.wim and committed the changes.

Some things that are noticable: The program uses the process of creating a patch for itself on systems that are not fully supported. This is noticed because it ended up writing into sysmain.sdb, which is the main application compatibility database for Windows. It also (appears) to create make it compatible with XP SP2, as it looks for that file as well. This is only my guess atm.

I'm off to test. If anyone has any ideas, let me know. I believe it is safe to ignore the DirectX warning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both BIT Std and BIT Pro seem to work fine when installed in an online WinPE 2.1.

However, repeated online installation does enter a grey area in terms of the license, which is why I try to avoid shareware.

The one requirement is an externally-sourced msvfw32.dll, and that, to me, means that the program is not supported under Windows PE 2.1 - strictly speaking.

Regards :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true.

I still get the same error 1. Their error doc has the following info:

Error 1, Incorrect Mathematical addition, SERIOUS

:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Referencing this thread:

http://www.passmark.com/forum/showthread.p...ht=mathematical

This error happens when an internal check of the hardware values fails, which in most cases means (as far as RAM or CPU) that the values are modified via overclocking. In my case, this happens during the volume portion.

The computer I am testing in (listed as SIXSHOT) has an XP drive in it right now. I copied the files onto that drive (instead of the PE) and it also errors out at the same spot. I will now do a fresh install onto that computer (instead of the dir copy) to see how well that fares.

As I had guessed it, the fresh install worked perfectly and did not throw an error. Now I will run a ProcMon on the working and non-working BIT installs and find out what is happening differently.

Still stuck...

After installing the software, the "copied" version also worked.

In the Winpe.wim I moved the BurnInTest folder from x:\windows and into x:\program files. Then made x:\documents and settings\all users\application data\ and copied the PassMark folder (from the XP drive) into there. Rebuild and reboot into the PE for results:

Still getting the same error, but now under video card section. I collected the PMLs for the working and non-working versions now and will compare them. By looking at a working one, it appears that BIT goes and tries to read everything from the registry concerning installed devices. This obviously fails in PE since none of the hardware is enumerated in the registry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the Winpe.wim I moved the BurnInTest folder from x:\windows and into x:\program files. Then made x:\documents and settings\all users\application data\ and copied the PassMark folder (from the XP drive) into there. ...

Under WinPE 2.1, the correct Path for the PassMark folder is:

X:\ProgramData\PassMark

ProgramData is a hidden directory.

Regards :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have reversed those changes. I downloaded a new build and it has an "install to USB" option. I have that put into the PE now but I can't test it atm because my test computer is being used for my recovery partition project. I put in a request to get another test computer, but until I get that I won't be able to do further testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tripredacus,

Sorry I don't have anything to add to your issue, but this has caught my eye:

it ended up writing into sysmain.sdb, which is the main application compatibility database for Windows.

Do you (or someone else) know whether it's possible to edit this database on a normal Windows installation? For the purpose of removing items.

I think Microsoft Application Compatibility Toolkit doesn't let you remove, just add things (it was a long time ago since I looked into it).

Also, does something else exist that is capable of editing it?

GL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I didn't see that post. Yes you can create "patches" to this using the Application Compatibility Toolkit. Its a pretty crazy program. I've used it once to get the sound in Destruction Derby 2 to work in XP, but I was following step-by-step instructions in creating the patch. I have no idea how to properly use the program if I try to figure it out myself.

As far as BurnInTest goes, Passmark says that it should work in Win PE as a demo via their instructions. I acquired a trial license to use for testing, and it came down to the fact that this is incorrect as far as Win PE 2.1. It will not run without a license. I have it running tests now and now I get to write up an SoP for its prospective use. Oh boy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...